pig2002

The Atlanta Dream is failing again.

They need a win, because I know they won't be able to win Game 5 if it goes back to Minneapolis.

LadyEve is my favorite domme for many reasons.

Cheesing on SF: easier with the difficulty at 7 than at 3?

Cheesing: To use unbalanced attacks repeatedly in order to win a game (considered "cheesy").

For those who know, every Street Fighter game since 1991's The World Warrior allows you to set the difficulty from 0 (one star; easiest) to seven (eight stars; hardest). From what I know, there are certain difficulties that are the easiest to cheese on and there are those that it is the hardest to do it on. From easiest to cheese to most difficult to cheese, here we go:

0

7

1

2

6

3

5

4

You read that right. It is easier to cheese when you set the difficulty at the hardest level than it is on any level, EXCEPT the easiest level. Why is this, I will never understand. But, based on the experiences from Street Fighter II: The World Warrior to Super Street Fighter IV (the most recent release in the spring of 2010); that is the order from easiest to most difficult to cheese computerized opponents. In fact, I've seen videos (on Videosurf) of people getting nothing but perfects on the hardest difficulty. And videos of people fighting on the medium levels are the ones that people used continues on.

A lot of people think that the lower the difficulty, the easier the competition. Not true when it comes to Street Fighter.

Voter ID laws: voter suppression by another name.

Thank you to E.J. Dionne for telling it like it is. States such as Wisconsin are actively engaging in voter suppression and it is up to us to overthrow any elected official who supports voter suppression laws (voter ID) by any means necessary.

Here is the op-ed that people in the Beltway will see tomorrow in their local paper:

An attack on the right to vote is underway across the country through laws designed to make it more difficult to cast a ballot. If this were happening in an emerging democracy, we’d condemn it as election-rigging. But it’s happening here, so there’s barely a whimper.

The laws are being passed in the name of preventing “voter fraud.” But study after study has shown that fraud by voters is not a major problem — and is less of a problem than how hard many states make it for people to vote in the first place. Some of the new laws, notably those limiting the number of days for early voting, have little plausible connection to battling fraud.

These statutes are not neutral. Their greatest impact will be to reduce turnout among African Americans, Latinos and the young. It is no accident that these groups were key to Barack Obama’s victory in 2008 — or that the laws in question are being enacted in states where Republicans control state governments.

Again, think of what this would look like to a dispassionate observer. A party wins an election, as the GOP did in 2010. Then it changes the election laws in ways that benefit itself. In a democracy, the electorate is supposed to pick the politicians. With these laws, politicians are shaping their electorates.

Paradoxically, the rank partisanship of these measures is discouraging the media from reporting plainly on what’s going on. Voter suppression so clearly benefits the Republicans that the media typically report this through a partisan lens, knowing that accounts making clear whom these laws disenfranchise would be labeled as biased by the right. But the media should not fear telling the truth or standing up for the rights of the poor or the young.

The laws in question include requiring voter identification cards at the polls, limiting the time of early voting, ending same-day registration and making it difficult for groups to register new voters.

Sometimes the partisan motivation is so clear that if Stephen Colbert reported on what’s transpiring, his audience would assume he was making it up. In Texas, for example, the law allows concealed handgun licenses as identification but not student IDs. And guess what? Nationwide exit polls show that John McCain carried households in which someone owned a gun by 25 percentage points but lost voters in households without a gun by 32 points.

Besides Texas, states that enacted voter ID laws this year include Kansas, Wisconsin, South Carolina and Tennessee. Indiana and Georgia already had such requirements. The Maine Legislature voted to end same-day voter registration. Florida seems determined to go back to the chaos of the 2000 election. It shortened the early voting period, effectively ended the ability of registered voters to correct their address at the polls and imposed onerous restrictions on organized voter-registration drives.

In 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court, by 6 to 3, upheld Indiana’s voter ID statute. So seeking judicial relief may be difficult. Nonetheless, the Justice Department should vigorously challenge these laws, particularly in states covered by the Voting Rights Act. And the court should be asked to review the issue again in light of new evidence that these laws have a real impact in restricting the rights of particular voter groups.

“This requirement is just a poll tax by another name,” state Sen. Wendy Davis declared when Texas was debating its ID law early this year. In the bad old days, poll taxes, now outlawed by the 24th Amendment, were used to keep African Americans from voting. Even if the Supreme Court didn’t see things her way, Davis is right. This is the civil rights issue of our moment.

In part because of a surge of voters who had not cast ballots before, the United States elected its first African American president in 2008. Are we now going to witness a subtle return of Jim Crow voting laws?

Whether or not these laws can be rolled back, their existence should unleash a great civic campaign akin to the voter-registration drives of the civil rights years. The poor, the young and people of color should get their IDs, flock to the polls and insist on their right to vote in 2012.

If voter suppression is to occur, let it happen for all to see. The whole world, which watched us with admiration and respect in 2008, will be watching again.

Here is the link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-states-are-rigging-the-2012-election/2011/06/19/AGCdB3bH_story.html

Again, we must speak out against the voter suppression laws that are being passed in conservative legislatures. States DO NOT have a right to deny law-abiding citizens of their right to vote.

If these state governments do not stop trying to suppress my votes and everyone else's votes, I will see to it that they are overthrown by force!

Time for the federal government to severely punish North Carolina, Texas, Tennessee and Indiana for violating women's 14th Amendment rights

WASHINGTON -- Most people by now know that the federal government is threatening to withhold all of Indiana's Medicaid funds on July 1 if the state proceeds with defunding Planned Parenthood.

The punishment does not fit the crime. And most people -- especially progressive allies -- are wondering why I said that.

The punishment does not fit the crime because the punishment is way too light for states that are all too willing to violate not just federal law prohibiting states from freezing funding of legitimate health care providers, but also blatantly violate the United States Constitution -- in this case, blatantly violating the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution.

So, what do I think is the appropriate punishment for states that defund Planned Parenthood?

The appropriate punishment for violating women's 14th Amendment rights should be an automatic loss of ALL federal funding for the offending states and NOT JUST health funds.States that defund Planned Parenthood (in clear violation of the 14th Amendment) should also LOSE EVERY SINGLE PENNY OF FEDERAL FUNDING THEY CURRENTLY RECEIVE FOR ALL SERVICES IN THE STATE. That includesthe funding states receive for disaster aid, highways, agriculture, education, and any other grant that the state(s) currently receive from Washington. So far, though, the Obama Administration has been moving at a pathetically slothful pace in punishing rogue states like Indiana, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas.

By stripping offending states (listed in the previous sentence) of all the federal funding they receive, it will send a powerful message that they can no longer trample women's 14th Amendment rights. Money talks, bullshit walks in these times. And by telling offending states that they must do without federal funding will make the states comply with the federal law, and must importantly, the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.

There is no such thing as a punishment too harsh when it comes to punishing states for defunding Planned Parenthood. The 14th Amendment of our Constitution always takes precedence over the 10th Amendment.

It is time for Obama and Sebelius to say enough is enough and strip Indiana, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas of ALL of their federal funding.